THIRD SECTION
CASE OF MISAKYAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 41542/20 and 48 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
7 November 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Misakyan and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Ioannis Ktistakis, President,
Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir,
Diana Kovatcheva, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 10 October 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained about their confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the criminal proceedings against them. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
Jurisdiction6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023).
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION7. The applicants complained principally about their confinement in a metal cage in the courtroom during the criminal proceedings against them. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.
8. The Court notes that the applicants were kept a metal cage in the courtroom in the context of their trial. In the leading cases of Svinarenko and Slyadnev v. Russia [GC], nos. 32541/08 and 43441/08, ECHR 2014 (extracts) and Vorontsov and Others v. Russia, no. 59655/14 and 2 others, 31 January 2017, the Court already dealt with the issue of the use of metal cages in courtrooms and found that such a practice constituted in itself an affront to human dignity and amounted to degrading treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention.
9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility (taking also into account the three-month extension introduced by decision of the President of the Court in 2020 as a consequence of the lockdown imposed in France on account of the COVID‑19 pandemic (see Saakashvili v. Georgia (dec.), nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20, §§ 46-59, 1 March 2022)) and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ confinement in a metal cage before the court during the criminal proceedings against them amounted to degrading treatment.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW11. Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its well-established case-law (see Idalov v. Russia [GC], no. 5826/03, §§ 103-08 and 154-58, 22 May 2012, and Tomov and Others v. Russia, nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, §§ 92‑156, 9 April 2019, concerning inadequate conditions of transport and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect; N.T. v. Russia, no. 14727/11, §§ 32-57, 2 June 2020, regarding routine handcuffing and inadequate conditions of detention of prisoners serving a life sentence; Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, §§ 101-11, 27 November 2012, concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention; Korshunov v. Russia, no. 38971/06, §§ 59-63, 25 October 2007, as regards absence of an enforceable right to compensation for a violation of a right to trial within a reasonable time; and Gorlov and Others v. Russia, nos. 27057/06 and 2 others, 2 July 2019, concerning permanent video surveillance of detainees and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect).
remaining complaints12. In view of the above findings under Article 3 of the Convention, the Court considers that there is no need to deal separately with the applicants’ remaining complaints under Article 13 of the Convention (for similar approach see Valyuzhenich v. Russia, no. 10597/13, § 27, 26 March 2019).
13. Some applicants also raised additional complaints under various Articles of the Convention.
14. The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
15. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION16. As to the applicants in applications nos. 44384/20, 29704/21 and 32074/21, the Court takes into account the previous awards made to these applicants and considers that the finding of a violation will constitute in itself sufficient just satisfaction (compare Ivanov and Others v. Russia [Committee], nos. 44363/14 and 2 others, § 12, 4 June 2020, and Puzanov v. Russia [Committee], nos. 26895/14 and 2 other applications, § 13, 15 September 2022),
17. As to the remaining applicants and regard being had to the documents in its possession, to awards made in previous cases to some of these applicants and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Vorontsov and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to join the applications;Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16 September 2022;Declares the complaints under Article 3 of the Convention about the applicants’ placement in a metal cage in the course of the criminal proceedings against them and other complaints raised under the well‑established case-law of the Court, as indicated in the attached table, admissible, finds that there is no need to examine separately the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of effective domestic remedies to complain about the use of metal cages, and declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ placement in a metal cage before the court during the criminal proceedings against them;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see the appended table);Holds(a) that the finding of a violation in applications nos. 44384/20, 29704/21 and 32074/21 will constitute in itself sufficient just satisfaction;
(b) that the respondent State is to pay the remaining applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(c) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 7 November 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Ioannis Ktistakis
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Name of the court
Date of the relevant judgment
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
41542/20
04/08/2020
Georgi Malkhazovich MISAKYAN
1973
Krasnoyarsk Regional Court:
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
7,500
41646/20
12/08/2020
Roman Alekseyevich SMAGIN
1992
Severodvinsk Town Court
06/05/2020
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transport on a number of occasions by van between the detention facilities and the courthouse during the criminal proceedings from 19/11/2019 to 06/05/2020; overcrowding, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature
8,500
41805/20
28/08/2020
Vitaliy Yakovlevich LIPPS
1986
Tsentralnyy District Court of Chita of the Zabaykalskiy Region,
Zabaykalskiy Regional Court
07/12/2020
7,500
42953/20
24/06/2020
Dmitriy Andreyevich KLIPPERT
1989
Oktyabskiy District Court of Penza
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
7,500
44384/20
17/09/2020
Oleg Gennadyevich LEONOV
1980
Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk
10/08/2020
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
45037/20
24/09/2020
Oleg Nikolayevich YELGIN
1967
Chernovskiy District Court of Chita
29/01/2020
7,500
45644/20
28/04/2021
Denis Andreyevich LODYGIN
1990
Justice of the Peace of the Kuratovskiy Judicial Circuit of Syktyvkar
10/03/2021
7,500
46354/20
13/10/2020
Stanislav Stanislavovich TSURIK
1961
Zyevskiy District Court of Kirov Region
22/07/2020
7,500
46982/20
07/09/2020
Aleksey Yuryevich KONDRATYEV
1986
Vorkuta Town Court of the Komi Republic
18/09/2020
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - overcrowding (0.3 sq. m per inmate), lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to toilet, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of fresh air during transportation in a train
between 23/07/2020 and 25/07/2020,
between 19/08/2020 and 20/08/2020,
between 28/12/2020 to 29/12/2020
8,500
46994/20
24/12/2020
Oleg Anatolyevich TOBOLIN
1980
Sosnogorsk Town Court of the Komi Republic
09/11/2020
Sosnogorsk Town Court of the Komi Republic
31/05/2021
7,500
47557/20
28/09/2020
Artem Vadimovich YEREMICHEV
1989
Kirovskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk
18/10/2021
Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - length of pre‑trial detention: from 14/08/2019 to 13/08/2020 and after quashing the initial judgment by the cassation court from 21/04/2021 to 18/10/2021, use of standard formula to extend the applicant’s detention; failure to consider alternative measures; fragility of the reasons employed;
Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Art. 5 § 3 of the Convention
9,750
47805/20
30/09/2020
Aleksey Vladimirovich PLOTNIKOV
1982
Justice of the Peace of the Judicial Circuit of the Chibyuskiy District of Ukhta, Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
24/07/2020
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
07/10/2021
2,750
47991/20
08/10/2020
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich CHERNOKNIZHNYY
1984
Vorkuta Town Court of the Komi Republic
31/08/2020
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - overcrowding
(0.3 sq. m per person), no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of fresh air during transportation between 19/12/2020 and 21/12/2020;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport
8,500
49023/20
16/10/2020
Denis Aleksandrovich OLESHKEVICH
1982
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
11/06/2020;
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic
Video link from IK-8, Komi Republic
21/08/2020;
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic
Video link from IK-8, Komi Republic
20/09/2021;
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
Video link from IK-8, Komi Republic
21/09/2021
Art. 8 (1) - permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities - IK-8 Komi Republic (12/03/2020 – pending on the date when the applicant was lodged with the Court) - opposite-sex operators, detention in different cells with video surveillance
7,500
49222/20
13/11/2020
Aleksandr Vasilyevich SMETANNIKOV
1985
Inta Town Court of the Komi Republic
08/10/2020
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - train, 21/11/2019‑24/10/2020, 0.33-0.5 sq. m per inmate. Specific grievances - insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack or insufficient quantity of food, lack of requisite medical assistance, transport for 6 hours, applicant transported on numerous occasions;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport
8,500
49871/20
25/09/2020
Denis Sergeyevich SERZHANIN
1982
Voroshilovskiy District Court of Volgograd;
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
4,750
51833/20
28/10/2020
Vladimir Alekseyevich KOPTEV
1989
Dzerzhinskiy District Court of Volgograd;
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
7,500
53064/20
13/11/2020
Galina Ivanovna IVANOVA
1962
Tsentralniy District Court of Tyumen
07/04/2020
7,500
53320/20
05/11/2020
Vladimir Vladimirovich KHELIKOV
1985
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich KHELIKOV
1992
both applicants complain about their placement in a metal cage during hearings before the Adlerskiy District Court of Sochi, and during hearings before the Krasnodar Regional Court by way of videoconference from a detention facility
02/06/2020
7,500,
to each of the applicants
53336/20
09/11/2020
Polina Olegovna YERMILOVA
2000
Traktorozavodskiy and Tsentralnyy District Courts of the Volgograd Region, Volgograd Town Court
08/09/2020
7,500
53886/20
16/11/2020
Vitaliy Vladimirovich NADUTKIN
1982
Udorskiy District Court of Koslan, Syktyvkar Town Court, Ezhvinskiy District Court of Syktyvkar of the Komi Republic
25/09/2020
7,500
55381/20
30/11/2020
Vladimir Dmitriyevich ANDREYEV
1954
Tula Regional Court
06/08/2020
7,500
254/21
20/11/2020
Stanislav Yevgenyevich MALOV
1985
Supreme Court of Russia
Video link from SIZO-1, Kazan, Tatarstan
16/06/2020
7,500
1936/21
01/12/2020
Marufzhon Makhammadaliyevich ISOMIDDINOV
1980
Usinsk Town Court of the Komi Republic
21/10/2020
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - van, train; from 15/08/2019 until 15/02/2021; 0.4 sq. m per person. Applicant transported on numerous occasions, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to warm water, overcrowding, no or restricted access to toilet
8,500
2303/21
25/11/2020
Aleksey Alekseyevich VDOVIN
2000
Naberezhnye Chelny Town Court, Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan;
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transported on numerous occasions: between Naberezhnye Chelny and Chistopol (160 km) between 15/02/2019 and 17/07/2020; between Naberezhnye Chelny and Kazan (240 km), 0.2 sq. m of personal space;
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport
8,500
2711/21
14/12/2020
Nikolay Aleksandrovich TOMOV
1996
Ust-Kulomskiy District Court of the Komi Republic
13/10/2020
7,500
6375/21
15/12/2020
Sergey Grigoryevich DANILICHEV
1976
Volgograd Regional Court
14/12/2020
Volzhskiy Town Court of Volgograd Region
27/08/2021
7,500
9033/21
01/01/2021
Vladimir Yevgenyevich KONSTANTINOV
1983
Koryazhma Town Court of the Arkhangelsk Region
02/10/2020
7,500
14406/21
04/02/2021
Sergey Yevgenyevich KOPYTOV
1991
Petrovsk-Zabaykalskiy Town Court of the Zabaykalsk Region
25/08/2020
7,500
14408/21
01/02/2021
Yuriy Sergeyevich BAZHUTOV
1985
Zheleznodorozhnyy District Court of Krasnoyarsk
24/01/2021
Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - detention from 02/12/2020 to 06/07/2021 ordered by the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Krasnoyarsk, the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court; the applicant was charged with robbery
8,200
15188/21
18/02/2021
Dmitriy Yevgenyevich SERGIYEVSKIY
1988
Justice of the Peace of Tentyukovskiy Judicial Circuit of Syktyvkar;
Ust-Vymskiy District Court of the Komi Republic
(from the detention facility being placed in a metal cage and by way of video conference)
18/02/2021
7,500
18012/21
12/03/2021
Maksim Nikolayevich PERUNOV
1985
Tsentralnyy District Court of Chita
07/12/2020
7,500
18486/21
18/03/2021
Sergey Viktorovich YEGOROV
1976
Oktyabrskiy District Court of St Petersburg, Krasnogvardeyskiy District Court of St Petersburg
19/01/2021
Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - 11/12/2019 – 10/08/2021, Oktyabrskiy District Court of St Petersburg, Krasnogvardeyskiy District Court of St Petersburg, St Petersburg City Court. Fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - on numerous occasions (at least 28 times) the applicant was transported from the remand prison to the courthouse and back in inhumane conditions (29/07/2020-10/08/2021); on the days of transfers the applicant spent about 4 hours in the assembly cell at the remand prison; the cell measured 18 sq. m and held 20 inmates having seating capacity for 12 persons; transfers lasted about 2 hours; in the van the applicant was placed in a compartment measuring 10 sq. m with 15 to 18 inmates; inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, passive smoking
8,100
19931/21
10/03/2021
Aleksey Pavlovich PESHCHEREV
1975
Kirovskiy District Court of Novosibirsk;
Novosibirsk Regional Court
11/11/2020
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - van: transport from the remand prison to the courthouse and back; each trip lasted 1.5 hours, the applicant was held in the compartment housing 12 to 16 inmates; train: transport from the remand prison to the correctional colony, from 12/12/2020 to 13/12/2020 (the trip lasted 4 hours), the applicant was held in a compartment with 8 other inmates; overcrowding, lack of fresh air, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to toilet
8,500
21459/21
29/03/2021
Mikhail Viktorovich GOROZHANKIN
1979
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
13/10/2020
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of permanent video surveillance;
Art. 8 (1) - permanent video surveillance of detainees in pre-trial or post-conviction detention facilities - SIZO-2 Komi Republic, 08/04/2020 - 31/03/2021 - opposite-sex operators, video surveillance in a lavatory and/or shower room
7,500
22671/21
20/03/2021
Bogdan Aleksandrovich PONOMAREV
1982
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
08/12/2020
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
02/03/2021
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
26/03/2021
Ukhta Town Court of the Komi Republic
12/04/2021
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
06/05/2021
Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic
13/05/2021
7,500
23079/21
05/04/2021
Pavel Yevgenyevich OSTROVSKIY
1995
Ussuriyskiy District Court of the Primorye Region, Solikamsk Town Court of the Perm Region
video link from SIZO-3, Ussuriysk, Primorye Region
28/01/2021
3,750
25320/21
04/10/2021
Maksim Anatolyevich PLASHIKHIN
1990
Ezhvinskiy District Court of Syktyvkar
07/06/2021
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - van, train; from 12/06/2021 to 02/07/2021, from 11/09/2021 to 13/09/2021 and from 15/10/2021 to 17/10/2021. Specific grievances: overcrowding, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to potable water, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to toilet. Van, train, from 11/09/2021 to 13/09/2021 and 15/10/2021 to 17/10/2021
8,500
26368/21
20/04/2021
Vladimir Alekseyevich ALEKSEYEV
1999
Ukhta Town Court, 20/10/2020;
Syktyvkar Town Court, 14/01/2021;
Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 04/03/2021
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - poor conditions of transport for 9 hours on 11/03/2021: insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of privacy for toilet, lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to potable water, overcrowding, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water; 1 sq. m per person
8,500
27583/21
04/05/2021
Vasiliy Petrovich BOROVTSOV
1975
Volzhskiy Town Court of the Volgograd Region, Volgograd Regional Court
01/04/2021
7,500
29704/21
04/05/2021
Aleksandr Vladislavovich BOGDANOV
1977
Vorkuta Town Court
16/03/2021
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - from 29/10/2021 to 31/10/2021, train, 0.2 sq. m per person overcrowding, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, passive smoking, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to potable water
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
32074/21
09/03/2021
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich DILSHNAYDER
1981
Sverdlovsk Regional Court, Ivdel Town Court of Sverdlovsk Region (by way of videoconference from the detention facility)
12/02/2021
Kirovskiy District Court of Novosibirsk
22/11/2021
The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction.
32317/21
27/03/2021
Anton Olegovich BELYAYEV
1992
Naberezhnyye Chelny Town Court
01/12/2021
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport;
Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - from 16/08/2019 to 01/12/2020, numerous and regular transfers by van between the detention facilities and the courthouse pending the criminal proceedings: 0,25 sq. m per inmate, overcrowding, applicant transported on numerous occasions, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, no or restricted access to toilet, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease
8,500
32847/21
09/06/2021
Artem Vasilyevich SHISHKIN
1990
Oktyabrsky District Court of Kirov
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
7,500
35012/21
13/10/2021
Pavel Anatolyevich ZHELEZNOV
1985
Sysolskiy District Court of the Komi Republic
07/09/2021
Justice of the Peace of the Lesozavodskiy Judicial Circuit of Syktyvkar
10/06/2022
7,500
37631/21
05/07/2021
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich BARUZDIN
1991
Sverdlovskiy District Court of Kostroma
11/02/2021
Kostroma Regional Court
01/07/2021
7,500
37680/21
30/06/2021
Andrey Aleksandrovich KUCHIN
1991
Koryazhma Town Court
12/04/2021
7,500
41704/21
23/07/2021
Uralbay Urazbayevich MAMBETOV
1997
Oktyabrskiy District Court of Tambov, Leninskiy District Court of Tambov
on-going placement in a cage on the date when the application was lodged with the Court
Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention; persistent reliance, as the case progressed, on charges concerning membership of an organised criminal group, 16/11/2020-pending as of 16/09/2022, Tambov Regional Court, First Appellate Court, latest extension - 01/04/2022, upheld on appeal on 20/04/2022
9,750
42328/21
27/12/2021
Omak Grigoryevich KHERTEK
1991
Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk
22/09/2021
Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - from 04/03/2020 to 22/09/2021, Oktyabrskiy District Court of Krasnoyarsk, Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to examine the possibility of applying other measures of restraint; failure to examine the possibility, as the case progressed, of applying other measures to secure attendance at the trial,
Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate compensation, for the violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
8,700
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.